Statistical errors and reporting deficiencies in clinical prosthodontic publications, 2019-2024

Area of Science:

• Dental Research
• Biostatistics
• Evidence-Based Dentistry

Background:

• Evidence-based dentistry requires accurate statistical analysis.
• Statistical misuse is prevalent, despite increased emphasis on rigor.
• Prosthodontic research has not been thoroughly evaluated for statistical accuracy.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the appropriateness, application, and reporting of statistical tests in prosthodontic journals.
• To identify persistent statistical misapplications and reporting deficiencies in prosthodontic research.
• To hypothesize that statistical errors are common in prosthodontic publications.

Main Methods:

• Reviewed 119 clinical studies from January 2019 to December 2024 in JOP, IJOP, and JPD.
• Assessed studies using a checklist covering test selection, sample size, assumption testing, calibration, and interpretation.
• Categorized studies by error severity (no major, minor, major) using a weighted scoring system.

Main Results:

• 88% of studies used appropriate statistical tests; 45% had no major statistical error.
• Significant deficiencies were found in sample size justification (32%), assumption testing (47%), and examiner calibration (40%).
• Confidence intervals were absent in 83% of reports; only 8% reported and interpreted them.

Conclusions:

• Statistical reporting deficiencies remain prevalent in prosthodontic research.
• Key areas needing improvement include sample size justification, assumption testing, and confidence interval reporting.
• Recommendations include specialty-specific checklists, enhanced training, and stricter editorial/reviewer standards.